Philadelphia Moving To Promote Students on Basis of Performance

Philadephia--In high schools and junior high schools across
Philadelphia, teachers have been asking the same question for years
about students who turn up in their classrooms with the academic skills
of 5th graders: "How did they get here?"

It is, of course, a rhetorical question, and most secondary-school
teachers and administrators here know that the answer is social
promotion, the Philadelphia School District's longstanding policy of
promoting most students from 1st grade through 8th grade simply because
they get older--but not necessarily wiser--each year.

But social promotion, school officials say, is soon to go from being
a matter of tradition to being a thing of the past.

Superintendent of Schools Constance E. Clayton has pledged to put in
place by September a promotion policy that would require students to
meet some type of academic standard before being promoted to the next
grade.

In doing so, Philadelphia joins several other metropolitan school
systems--including New York, Atlanta, and Dade County, Fla.--that,
under public pressure to demonstrate that students are actually
learning in school, have abandoned the practice of advancing students
on the basis of age and are now tying promotion to test scores or some
other quantifiable criteria.

Difficult Issues

Making the transition, however, from an ingrained social-promotion
system to a promotion policy based on academic standards is proving to
be no simple task in Philadelphia, the nation's fifth-largest school
district.

A high-level committee of school officials and community
representatives is now wrestling with a series of difficult issues
related to such a policy--the kind of standards students would be
required to meet, whether those standards should apply in all grades or
only at several so-called "gates," and what type of remedial help
schools should provide for students who are held back.

And a recent study prepared by school officials for Ms. Clayton's
promotion commit6tee estimated that the percentage of students
currently in grades 1 through 8 could triple or quadruple by June 1985
if a promotion policy based on academic standards is established.

Currently, the district holds back about 8.7 percent of its
enrollment--about 9,800 students--in the eight grades.

If students in those grades were required for promotion to pass
achievement tests in reading and mathematics at "minimal" levels next
year, the study estimated, the district would have to retain about 23.2
percent of its enrollment, or about 24,300 students in grades 1 through
8.

And if students were required to pass achievement tests at levels
high enough to ensure that they were on grade level in reading and
mathematics, according to the study, the district would have to retain
about 38.4 percent of its enrollment, or about 40,265 students.

Indeed, as one school-district official said recently, members of
Ms. Clayton's promotion committee are having a difficult time
developing a policy because "whenever they have to face up to the
reality of the number of kids that would be retained in each grade,
they start to get cold feet."

While other district officials warn that deficiencies in existing
data probably led them to overestimate the number of students that
would be held back under a new promotion policy, the estimates in the
recent study make one thing clear: The number of retentions would
soar.

Underachievement Noted

Debra Weiner, a well-known citizen activist in public education here
and a member of the committee developing the new promotion policy, said
the study's estimates provide "a dramatic sense of the magnitude of
underachievement in the system."

"This school system," she said, "has a long way to go in terms of
improving academic achievement."

In the final analysis, a policy that would require holding back much
larger numbers of students in the first eight grades would probably be
preferable to what is now taking place, Ms. Weiner and others
suggest.

Currently, most students are socially promoted in grades 1 through
8. But oncethe city's students get to high school--where state-mandated
graduation requirements provide an achievement-based promotion
policy--the failure rate skyrockets.

In the 1981-82 school year, for example, the district's retention
rate went from 6.3 percent of 8th-grade students to 19.5 percent of all
9th graders and 26 percent of all 10th graders.

Probably the best estimate of what the citywide impact of a new
promotion policy would be comes from one section of the city system in
which a promotion policy based on academic standards was started in
1982-83 as a pilot project.

As part of the project, conducted in Northwest Philadelphia and
generally supported by parents, students in grades 2, 5, and 8 were
required for promotion to pass achievement tests at minimal levels for
reading and mathematics.

By May 1983, district officials had identified about 950 students in
grades 2, 5, and 8 as likely candidates for retention--about triple the
number left back the previous year.

However, simply by holding those students up to a standard and
warning them that they would probably be held back, officials said, 200
managed to improve their performance enough by June to be promoted.

Ultimately, about 750 students in the three grades were held
back--more than twice the number of students retained in those grades
the previous year.

But of those 750 students who were held back in June 1983, about 470
completed an intensive five-week summer-school program offered to
provide remedial instruction as part of the project. And about 300 of
those students made enough progress during summer school to move on to
the next grade in September without repeating a year.

Web Only

Notice: We recently upgraded our comments. (Learn more here.) If you are logged in as a subscriber or registered user and already have a Display Name on edweek.org, you can post comments. If you do not already have a Display Name, please create one here.

Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.